Appeal to pity |
Logical Fallacy of Ad Misericordiam / Appeal to pity / Appeal to SympathyThe logical fallacy of Ad Misericordiam occurs when pity is used rather than truth to support a conclusion. Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Ad Misericordiam / Appeal to pity / Appeal to Sympathy
Whether or not they work hard is not the issue. Are tax dollars the best source for their pay, and does the use of tax dollars assure that scientists will follow a course that is most beneficial for society?
Appeals to pity for the mother, but never addresses the fact that abortion kills a human being who is innocent. And people who use this argument generally don’t support the death penalty for the rapist.
All of these are examples of the logical fallacy of Ad Misericordiam. They ignore the fact that a baby is being murdered. You may note that they are very useful in politics. That's because politics is not about truth.
Of course, this has nothing to do with whether or not the teachings of evolutionism are true. Note that they never mention that this is because of the hiring discrimination among atheists and ungodly people.
Those poor evolutionists who want to teach evolution have no effect on whether or not evolution has anything to do with reality. This is also a case of special pleading since it demands one set of rules for evolutionists and a totally different set of rules for creationists. It is also a straw man fallacy in that creationists don’t oppose evolution being taught—they oppose hiding the problems with evolution from the students.
This is an appeal to pity fallacy, because it avoids the issue at hand: is molecules-to-man evolution something that happened? It also does not follow that belief in evolution would help anyone make good life decisions—most likely, the opposite would be true. Fallacy Abuse
This is fallacy abuse. Rocky was not crying on Sandy's shoulder. Sandy was claiming a false criteria for determining scientific truth. Rocky pointed out the reason that Sandy's contention was wrong. Sandy twisted Rocky's statement into a straw man argument.
![]()
How can we know anything about anything? That’s the real question |
Other Pages in this sectionAvoiding the Issue Misleading Vividness Dodging the Question Irrelevant Conclusion Irrelevant Question Parade of the Horribles Appeal to Motives Red Herring Answering a Question with a Question Answering a Different Question Non-Support Quibbling Admit a Fault to Cover a Denial Arguing a Minor Point and Ignoring the Main Point Galileo Wannabe (Pity) Appeal to Novelty Appeal to High Tech Traditional Wisdom The Way We Have Always Done It Appeal to Desperation Straw Man Fallacy Extension In a Certain Respect and Simply Appeal to Extremes Quote Out of Context Misquoting Accent by Emphasis Accent by Abstraction Contextomy Misinterpretation Playing Dumb Arcane Explanation Hyperbole Exaggeration Irrelevant Thesis Burden of Proof Uneven Burden of Proof Burden of Proof Fallacy Fallacy Argument to Moderation Fallacy Abuse Confusing an Explanation with Proof Moralism Ought-Is Is-Ought Naturalistic Fallacy Notable Effort Political Correctness False Compromise Lip Service Tokenism Argument by Denial Diminished Responsibility Contrarian Argument Recently Viewed |